92 Decision Citation: BVA 92-10860
Y92
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
DOCKET NO. 92-55 407 ) DATE
)
)
)
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to a compensable evaluation for the
postoperative residuals of a meniscectomy of the right
knee.
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Adrian D. Jackson, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active service from August 1986 until August
1990.
This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(hereinafter "the Board") on appeal from a rating decision
of October 1990 from the New York, New York, Regional Office
(hereinafter "the RO"). The notice of disagreement was
received in January 1991. The statement of the case was
issued in April 1991. The substantive appeal was received
in April 1991. A personal hearing was held before a hearing
officer at the RO in July 1991. A supplemental statement of
the case was issued in November 1991. The appeal was
received and docketed at the Board in February 1992. The
appellant acts as his own representative.
CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL
The appellant's primary argument is that the originating
agency erroneously denied a compensable disability
evaluation for the postoperative residuals of a right knee
meniscectomy. He maintains that the RO failed to assess his
disability correctly and that his current clinical signs and
manifestations are productive of a compensable evaluation.
He points out that he suffers from pain and experiences
instability of the right knee.
DECISION OF THE BOARD
For the reasons and bases hereinafter set forth, it is the
decision of the Board that the preponderance of the evidence
warrants a compensable evaluation for the postoperative
residuals of a meniscectomy of the right knee.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. All relevant evidence necessary for an equitable
disposition of the veteran's appeal has been obtained by the
agency of original jurisdiction.
2. Recent physical examination revealed crepitus while
X-ray revealed encroachment of the patella upon the
retropatellar femoral space and intracapsular swelling. The
knee disability continues to be painful on motion and there
has been surgical removal of cartilage.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The schedular criteria for a 10 percent evaluation for the
postoperative residual of a right knee meniscectomy, have
been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.40,
Diagnostic Code 5259.
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Initially, it is necessary to determine if the appellant has
submitted a well-grounded claim and if so, whether the
Department of Veterans Affairs has assisted the appellant in
properly developing his claim. The appellant's claim
appears to be reasonably based. Our review of the evidence
further indicates that all relevant facts have been properly
developed and that there is sufficient evidence upon which
to fairly resolve the issue raised by the instant case.
Therefore, a remand in order to permit additional
development of the record is unnecessary.
A brief historical review of the veteran's medical history
indicates that at an August 1986 induction examination his
lower extremities were noted as normal. During service the
veteran underwent a partial lateral meniscectomy of the
right knee in February 1989. In December 1989 he underwent
a second arthroscopic procedure in which intra-articular
shaving of the lateral femoral condyle was performed. The
veteran noted in his August 1990 separation examination that
he had "problems bending the knees and doing prolonged
kneeling." However, no orthopedic disability was noted by
the examiner.
Disability evaluations are based on the comparison of
clinical findings with the applicable schedular criteria.
38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. Part 4. In this regard, at an
August 1991 Veterans Affairs examination the veteran
presented complaints of pain and swelling of the knee. The
veteran also noted that prolonged activity caused limited
motion of the knee. Physical examination disclosed that the
veteran was able to walk one mile without difficulty. There
was no apprehension or restriction of motion. The veteran's
anteroposterior drawer sign was negative as was his
Lachman's. Significantly, however, crepitus was shown and
x-ray revealed that the superior quadrant of the patella had
encroached upon the retropatella femoral space. There was
also noted intracapsular swelling with no gross bony defect
noted. Moreover, the examiner's impression was
chondromalacia and classified the veteran's disability as
chronic. The examiner also noted that the veteran should
continue rehabilitation therapy.
A physician's statement dated January 1991 reveals that the
veteran was examined in December 1990 and January 1991 after
presenting complaints of pain. The physician recommended
that the veteran continue rehabilitation therapy also.
Accordingly, because a 10 percent evaluation is warranted
for the characteristic symptoms due to the removal of
semilunar cartilage of either knee under Diagnostic Code
5259 and the knee, is in fact, symptomatic, we find a 10
percent evaluation to be warranted.
In reaching this decision the Board carefully considered an
extraschedular evaluation pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.321;
however, the record does not reveal an exceptional or
unusual disability picture so as to render impractical the
application of the regular schedular standards.
ORDER
A 10 percent evaluation for the postoperative residuals of a
right knee meniscectomy is granted subject to the current
laws and regulations governing the award of monetary
benefits.
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
JEFF MARTIN IRVIN H. PEISER, M.D.
E. W. SEERY
NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C. § 7266 (1991),
a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals granting less
than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is
appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals
within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of the
decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement concerning
an issue which was before the Board was filed with the
agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18,
1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687,
§ 402 (1988). The date which appears on the face of this
decision constitutes the date of mailing and the copy of
this decision which you have received is your notice of the
action taken on your appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.